Ramblings and ruminations about and around Asheville, my “Appalachian barrio”—nestled at the confluence of the Swannanoa River and the French Broad River in Western North Carolina.

Thursday, December 15, 2016

SOME post-election posts (or notes). Copy-pasted from my Facebook Page. I didn't update or edited these entries from the original posts. (Part 1)

DID
presidential candidates “play” the voting public? I believe the
word isn't “play.” Maybe as Jeff Beck (the guitarist, not the
other Beck) said, politicians “lie.” They lied because they knew
it'd be easy to lie than to sell facts—facts that will against
them. Elections are about winning—whatever it takes. And in
American elections, always a very few percentage show up. Lowest was
the 46 percent in the Clinton/Dole race in 1996. This last one was
the second-lowest. So candidates are actually talking to a “few”
captured audience—that is why catchphrases and sloganeering worked.
Like rahrah in a ball game.

Trump promised these, Sanders promised
those—cakes from polar extremes. Yet the story behind it all
is—OIL. Oil is more than gold. Saudi Arabia is slowly but surely losing clout with America
and West. The Saudi-led OPEC countries have been threatening to cut oil
output as Russia and non-OPEC members battle them for pricing. Two
weeks ago, OPEC agreed to reduce its
own production by 1.2 million barrels a day. This developed following
Russia's previous announcement that it had already announced plans to
cut output by 300,000 barrels a day next year, down from a 30-year
high last month of 11.2 million barrels a day. Mexico also pledged to
cut 100,000 barrels, Azerbaijan by 35,000 barrels and Oman by 40,000
barrels. The US' main oil imports come from Canada, Saudi Arabia and
Venezuela. Russia and SA are the world's top #2 crude oil producing
countries; the US accounts for nearly 20 percent of the world's total
oil consumption per day.

There
is no such thing as making America great again. It is just a matter
of handing over the baton to the next leader who can negotiate better
with oil giants. All the Mexico talk is bull. Mexico is still the US'
#3 trade partner and it's a next-door neighbor plus a huge population
that is an economic force than illegal nuisances. Russia could be the
#2 exporter of oil to the US which will make the Kochs happier since
they could deregulate pricing et al by virtue of Russia's entry to
WTO in 2012. And China despite Trump's anti-China rhetoric is still
the China whose crap clogs US retail and been lending money to all
corners of the world, especially to giants like Brazil and Venezuela
and yes, Russia. Trade balance, military spending (while Pyongyang
continues to bait Washington to keep on spending on military
hardware), pharmaceutical 1 percent's machinations in Afghanistan and
Myanmar/Indonesia (Asean) via George Soros etc.

The Assange leaks
were obvious—yet it could sway elections. But don't people know
that it's all Russia while the dude lives in an Ecuadorian embassy?
Ecuador and China have lotsa investment deals. Trump is dealing
cards, not running a country based on new policies that should go
beyond stone age protectionism. What has done so far—Carrier and
the Mexico transer and appointment of environmental czars who makes
folly of climate change. Is that making America great again? It's the
same scribblings on the white board. But well, these win elections
especially that candidates are talking to only half of the populace. xxxxx

ONE
very effective campaign game changer that worked for Trump was the
WikiLeaks Hillary email fiasco. Julian Assange is a genius—a genius
hacking xxxxxxx harlequin. Right on time, right on target. He knew
that a huge throng of Democrats (mostly Sanders believers) will
easily bite his candy—they did. I know of a number of Democrats who
switched to either Trump or Johnson or decided not to vote at all
after the email leaks came out on crunch time. I believe that jacked
up Trump votes easily. After the fact, I am more interested to
observe how Washington deals with Kremlin/Russia than question or
protest Trump's victory. He won, period.
xxxxx

WHEN
it comes down to it, it is fine that followers of two political polar
extremes stay glued to their belief—as long as the crack isn't so
wide so that compromise and negotiation are still possible. I believe
that it is much better than when people are seemingly bunched on just
one side. That'd eventually allow dictatorship or autocracy—even if
at the get go one-person governance commands majority allegiance.
Those who will oppose him/her become rebels whether we define them as
Right or Left. Yet as in the nature of humankind, I don't believe all
of us will agree as one—although universal good and evil seem to
tread a parallel balance like black and white. We are not like that.
We are either half-weirdo or a bit saintly. Many times the insane
becomes cool and mutate into a rock star--and the sane turns out
boring and never get a date. Humans are that unpredictable and
contradictory. So Trump voters and Hillary believers, it's okay to
argue—as long as somewhere somehow you'd all line-dance to the Bee
Gees' “Night Fever” on syncopated cadence.xxxxx

IF majority or all of those who voted for Trump are
racist, sexist and xenophobic as their leader, and then the leader
won--then something is really ailing with America. Really bad. Not
the government or President-elect per se but it's own people. These
are Americans as in heartland America. And if we study the
demographics, these are mostly Americans who got ran over to poverty
in the last ten or 20 years. That hardship pulled their American-ness
out of the hole--because they found a voice. They don't see their
America anymore in retail stores, in media, in a politically-correct
pop culture, in basic structures of society--especially when America
masterminded the entry of China then Russia to WTO and let
globalization dance for the 1 Percent. So when a despot like Trump
came out swinging, they heard some of their muffled voice in his
rhetoric. They don't see good life in another Democrat. They don't
see good like in another Republican like Bush either. They see it in
someone who promises a new order by spouting an anti-GOP girth and
fuck the corporations/let's reclaim America bombast--who also didn't
have a public office portfolio which only fired up his line. That's
how Adolph Hitler rose to power--by appealing to the disenfranchised
German majority who's been relegated to the background. And he
rescued the economy in the next 4 or 6 years--before got totally
insane.

In
America, in the polar extreme of disgruntled America--are those who
opted for Bernie Sanders who promised his throng a sociopolitical
system that hasn't been tried in the US (not even with FDR's New Deal
in mid-1900s), the same "voice" that Trump sounded albeit
on a different sociocultural spectrum. A new system. Those voices
communicated with a disgruntled mass--polar extremes but those were
the words that many wanted. Hillary Clinton is a centrist. So they
didn't see her as their messenger or deliverer--it's more the ethnic
communities who liked Clinton. The difference though in terms of
Trump/Sanders voters, Trumps went out to vote but Bern people opted
not to--which is tactically flawed. Truth is, it's either Trump or
Hillary for president--but by dividing the Dem's vote, that'd only
catapult the GOP bet to presidency, which happened. Meanwhile, I
observe many arguments and discussion on Facebook--and I can say both
sides exude both rude and disrespectful tact. That was a nasty
election--and not just because the Conservatives are nasty--it's
because it is general nasty. And social media gave people somehow the
"license" to talk ill of these candidates and their
followers. I am called moron and idiot and stupid by Bern followers
and "go home to your Third World dump!" (my country of
birth is not 3rd world) by Trump fanatics although all I did was
present facts. Bottomline, it comes down to who got a mass base that
was intact despite partyline schism, Donald Trump. While the
Democrats need to go back to the drawing board how to instill
partyline allegiance from its mass base and leadership. It's after
all a united front that instills power, whether it is by means of
democratic elections or revolution. Which the Democrats/progressives
failed to show. That for me is worrisome.xxxxxFACEBOOK
is fun as long as you don't take it seriously. It's like these: Hey,
Trump has lots of dandruff, that's not good for a president. I just
voted, look at my face. I saw this lady on Sam Edelman boots that
looked like wading boots. My mom is a nasty little rightwinger bitch!
You know that I just read Hillary emailed Michelle this awful
squirrel casserole recipe? Assange just hacked my ex-husband—Julian
is my hero! By the way, I will be cooking Beef Bourguignon tonight
but I guess, uh, no. My deadbeat boyfriend couldn't even hold it for
freakin' three minutes! I think I will break up with him tonight.
Bernie would have waived my parking tickets. Look at my new
socks—recycled from spring rolls wrappers. President Kirk is a
moron! Namaste to y`all! Dafuq with what?

xxxxx

WHAT's
good thing after an election? Time to bring out the notepad and list
down what have been promised. Time to REALLY figure it out if those
make sense--and then begin the true duty or responsibility of a
citizen. Expectation check. Time for deliveries. Since the truth is,
whether you voted for Trump or Hillary or still meditating a Bernie
mantra--you are going to pay the rent this month, swipe a debit card
for gasoline, and provide yourself and family health insurance. Let
Life resume! Taco, please!xxxxx

AFTER
the primaries, it seemed very clear that whoever the Republican
Party's bet was, it is still very likely that that candidate will
beat a Democratic Party rival. Why? The problem isn't the GOP. The
problem is the Democrats' mass base--it is already cracked. In the
same way that rank `n file Conservatives are angry with President
Obama's administration, a huge chunk of the other side (mostly Bernie
Sanders followers) also feel betrayed by the outgoing president's
two-terms. But then the Right remained tight—not exactly the
hierarchy per se, but their voting bailiwicks are formidable—and
even spread through some states that were first thought as majority
Dems. Meantime, the GOP in Congress built a wall against Obama's
signature bills in re immigration reform and gun control et al.
Those stayed as is Bush's time. Also, within the Dems, Sanders should
have acted as a party stalwart and not a so-called people liberator.
Instead of rallying his supporters toward Clinton's side to ensure
the defeat of Trump, he distanced himself. Trump's victory of margin
isn't a landside, it was close. Which means, if Bern people voted for
Hillary and not the 3rd option—or they didn't boycott the election, the Democratic bet
would have a better chance of winning. At this point, the Democratic
Party needs a lot of regrouping and rethinking—on how to at least
narrow the gap or vacuum in their house and backyard. Meantime,
inhale exhale—and enjoy some tacos.xxxxx

TRUMP
is what he is. Hillary is what she is. Bernie is what he is. Obama is
what he is. Frank Underwood is what he is. These are individuals with
their respective "I am what I am" that stays in them--that
is why they ran as President of what is supposedly the strongest
nation in the world. We can't just change them no matter how we
namecall or judge them. But what must change is people's attitude and
behavior on election time. The only way to winning is via a united
front. And a united front makes a strong nation--irrelevant who sits
as President. A united front installs a leader--a united front brings
down a leader. However, a divided throng only brings forth a bad
Taco. That is the truth.